OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the biomechanical properties of both plate location (superior versus anterior-inferior) and plate type Small Fragment Contourable Dual Compression Plate (CDCP) versus 3.5 mm Universal Locking System Contourable Dual Compression Plate (Locked CDCP) in a synthetic midshaft transverse clavicle fracture model. METHODS: Twenty-four pre-osteomized synthetic clavicles were repaired with either CDCP or locked CDCP technology 3.5 mm plates in either the superior or anterior-inferior position to form 4 groups of 6 clavicles. These were subsequently tested to evaluate torsional and axial construct stiffness, as well as bending load to failure, bending failure stiffness, and method of failure. RESULTS: In axial compression, locked CDCP constructs were significantly more stiff than CDCP constructs (p < 0.001), but no statistically significant effect of plate location was observed. Torsional tests demonstrated a significant 2-way interaction favoring locked CDCP plates in the superior position and standard CDCP plates in the anterior-inferior position (p < 0.001). Bending failure testing revealed that the superior plate location had higher load to failure and bending failure stiffness than the anterior-inferior location (p < 0.0001). In addition, the superior locked CDCP plates demonstrated significantly greater bending failure stiffness than superior CDCP plates (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Biomechanically, repairing a midshaft clavicle fracture with a superior plate was more favorable compared to anterior-inferior plating in terms of both load to failure and bending failure stiffness. Furthermore, superior locked CDCP plates show improved bending failure stiffness over superior CDCP plates.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the biomechanical properties of both plate location (superior versus anterior-inferior) and plate type Small Fragment Contourable Dual Compression Plate (CDCP) versus 3.5 mm Universal Locking System Contourable Dual Compression Plate (Locked CDCP) in a synthetic midshaft transverse clavicle fracture model. METHODS: Twenty-four pre-osteomized synthetic clavicles were repaired with either CDCP or locked CDCP technology 3.5 mm plates in either the superior or anterior-inferior position to form 4 groups of 6 clavicles. These were subsequently tested to evaluate torsional and axial construct stiffness, as well as bending load to failure, bending failure stiffness, and method of failure. RESULTS: In axial compression, locked CDCP constructs were significantly more stiff than CDCP constructs (p < 0.001), but no statistically significant effect of plate location was observed. Torsional tests demonstrated a significant 2-way interaction favoring locked CDCP plates in the superior position and standard CDCP plates in the anterior-inferior position (p < 0.001). Bending failure testing revealed that the superior plate location had higher load to failure and bending failure stiffness than the anterior-inferior location (p < 0.0001). In addition, the superior locked CDCP plates demonstrated significantly greater bending failure stiffness than superior CDCP plates (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Biomechanically, repairing a midshaft clavicle fracture with a superior plate was more favorable compared to anterior-inferior plating in terms of both load to failure and bending failure stiffness. Furthermore, superior locked CDCP plates show improved bending failure stiffness over superior CDCP plates.
Authors: Lars Eden; Stefanie Doht; Sönke P Frey; Dirk Ziegler; Jan Stoyhe; Kai Fehske; Torsten Blunk; Rainer H Meffert Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2012-10-17 Impact factor: 3.075